kicks rd care act fully in today but yesterday there was temporary hold for some religious organizations. until friday has to respond. recovering from a respiratory issue. she's in great spirits. of new laws go into effect today. new voter id laws in arkansas, rhode island and obama. this first dayon

of 2014. from you what ar you would like washington to do or not do. talk about the debt limit and the house senate with or the white house the affordable care act and the between the 14 elections but we framed it. and 14 i want washing to you fill in the blank from there. 202-585-threat 882 for 202-585-3882 for independents. about 1300 comments since we can d it yesterday and you send us e-mail to.

journal@c-span.org. year.orning and happy new facebook had over 1300 comments on this question since we posted it last night. let me give you a couple of them. here. raves has one word he says work. that's a comment he posted on up book and that's followed by bill. take a 60% pay cut. susan t's followed up by ohnson -- that's some of the comments made off facebook. on twitter people are responding. that he wantsying to see republican control of the house and senate. only two of the ways you can respond in 2014. we give you the option to fill

out the blank. 202-585-3881. of the newfirst call year here's bryant from memphis, tennessee on our democrats line. morning. caller: good morning. the only thing i wish is that not get in the way of the affordable care act for anyone. in other words, women have a to birth control or take care of their own bodies and the shouldn't stand in the way or affordable care act. just unconscionable to me. why are you focus on this?

>> well, because we make certain rules. it's like -- as we make rules, we have to address them. it's not just this, it's just in recent ame up days. o, that's what i'm responding to. >> that's bryant from memphis, tennessee. democrats line. next up is gary joins us from sterling, virginia. morning. >> thank you. eisenhower republican. i'd like to see analyze and with computer echnology so we don't end up underprioritized, under bid traffic improvements. get s what we need to people out of traffic -- see that where you

virginia?terling, >> absolutely. we've had interchange that was 163%.id by two people being killed up there interchange. it's a bottle neck. this happening time and time again. generally over half the interchanges that are being uilt have been under about bid from anywhere from 95%, 145%. with bottle up -- s and this has cost people's lives are going up in figuratively. and >> are you in the transportation always interested in this kind of topic. >> i've been to every state in union. i move furniture for about five i've hitchhiked across

the united states six times back in the late '60s, early 'seventies. for ten hhiked to work years you and really got to study the traffic patterns. i've worked on the roads, under the roads andides it's a shame what -- political plumb tree that's the way they're using the system. washing to... nt you get to fill in the blank from there. can focus on issues in correct me if i'm wrong or the white house. you heard people talk about issues.tation again, you can give us a call on the lines and reach out to us on well. media as c.t. from westerly rhode island independent line. hi. >> hell caller: hello and top of the new year to you. >> thank you. aller: i do wish the people at

-span a very, very good and worth while new year. irst of all, i would like very much for congress and i mean house tosenate and the -- reintro introduce a amendment. the last time it was coresponsered was up to the end 2012. ron paulby congressman who of course has retired and senator.e who is now a would like to see many, many of the members of the senate and of the house to cosponsor the amendment. >> for those who may not know in the liberty hat is

amendment? >> the liberty amendment is a of legislation that would and effect who are original constitution. the one that was put together by the founding fathers. eliminate the many, any elements of our government that should not be there. >> that's c.t. from rhode island. this is off twitter -- facebook, twitter or e-mail give us your response. want washing to -- here's louisiana.

hi clyde. caller: howdy. ahead. caller: i agree what he said shall the children running the got.ry is what i think we wrong w i mean, the people seem like they got off on the wrong foot. here in oklahoma we have a with drugs down here. bad. real evil spirits even stand by on makes you wonder what we have in the world today. > karl, good morning on the republican line. i think i may have pushed the wrong button i have two questions for you. question, will c-span will get president obama's reyears why can't the resident issue an executive

order to bring him back for weekend? don't you answer the question we're answering as well. i wants washing to. in the blank?fill >> well i don't pay taxes. i'm retired now. stay open on weekends there so political some more talk. >> we're on seven day as week. you want othing washington to do specifically? > they're not gonna close down i in the hope. >> you mean over the debt kraoel something they have 2 or 3 things coming up. it seems like they always like deadline. the horse. he ran first until the baseline and then lost. they seem to like the finish line for everything. and you get a r loser. but guess what? they go back to the same stuff. winners and losers and finish

ines and they get it -- if i didn't have c-span, i've been watching you guys since '95, if you guys to turn washington, d.c., if i didn't have that i won't even talk to my tv. it is now, i'm screaming at it 24 hours a day. appreciate you watching and thank you for doing so. you heard a previous caller supreme court justi justice sonya soto mayor. -- her decision delays control s birth mandate. it says that she acted on request from an organization of nuns in denver. emergency t for an stay was denied by a federal appeals court. gave them until ten am to

respond. there as story today talking a little bit about what happens as of today. starting today health insurance ompanies cannot no longer deny coverage for preexisting onditions and cannot charge premiums. jack, in 2014 what do you want washing to do or not do? our independent line. hi. caller: i'd like to see financial get their

house in order. us out herele and in america the working people, we're taxed to limit and they down there they decided to tax us harder. we have to balance our checkbook and i think it's about time they their checkbook. >> where do you think it starts? should it start? with?at should it start >> we can start with many things. first of all, we can look at all the -- uption and all too much growth down there in washington and too many plans programs.ny you can eliminate the corruption that would take a big chunk right there for the american people and they won heavily.e taxed so >> republicans you can tall

202-585-3881 and democrats and for independent 202-585-38882. notice on the screen in 2014 i want washing to. we'll give you a chance where you want to focus on the congress or the white house or washington.s of the health law we talked about xpands january 1st and expansion of medicaid. the washington post highlights the front page saying that as of today 25 states and district of columbia expanded medicaid and many of those places program will be the first time to 138% whose becomes below of the poverty level. individuals making less th

collin from castle rock, colorado. democrats line. caller: yes. there are a couple of things i'd like to see congress do the other to leave countries like russia and china tell f not bully them and them what to do all the time and things out with them. afghanistan, you know, the is not going to be what america wants and it's going to be like the vietnam i'm afraid. it's going to change to something that we don't like but then it will finally -- our forces that have been there at a st can show them what little bit of freedom is and will reject being told what to do. them toll take time for

people we don't want them in the government to do to in there. but that will all change just like vietnam. really need to quit ruling the rest of the world concentrate on our country and make it a better place. we have so many prisoners -- we prisoners in jail than country. >> the call was from colorado laws.t the many new colorado law allowing recreational marijuana sale. denver post says pot comes full circling. jenny, up next. lancaster, ohio republican line. caller: hi how are you. what, i like to know haveany people in congress

business degrees. don't, they need to make business when they those decisions. of them are attorneys and attorneys forget that the laws to them also. what i wanted to know and i should have thought of myself, i hought it was silly when they lo closed the white house down to save money. they opened it up for tours. >> limited tours. but you know what i'm saying, isn't that silly? that's a silly thing do. going back to your idea for congress being -- i wonder about their business degree backgrounds. why do you focus on that? >> why do i? why do you focus on it? bunch ofct like a

>> they act like a bunch of come poops. know business. >> from twitter -- if in 2014 you want washington or not do something, chance to comment on it now on the phone line on acebook and off twitter or e-mail. harry from obama, democrats line, hi. caller: yes, sir. my name is terry. ask got two questions to you. one, our representatives act like little kids. have a better world and a better washington, d.c. these people don't care bout health or about social security people. they need a raise, moon what they get. nowadays it's hard for anybody

to live on what they get. that includes republicans. they should stop giving them the raises. they don't need raises every year. give to the people who need it the homeless and that. would be better off. >> to put a freeze when she was sked about what she wants washington do to freeze on utilities. i todd, up next from pineville, arkansas. republican line, good morning. caller: good morning. question i would like government to shrink. would like washington to become less intrusive in our lives. when you say you want starting to sluhrink,

where? >> primarily laws. the amount of control that the government has over our aily life with intrusion into education which should be a statish skpaou not a federal intrusions into health which i find no reason for the government government to be health. in our >> brad from st. paul, minnesota. democrats line. >> caller: yes, i would like to see national pass a minute number income that is labor. d to >> you can expand on that? >> many of your callers believe big.government is too my opinion that is capitolism is too big. watching your network

earlier this evening and i saw a onservative say that the unemployed should be dragged to in chains. hat is not what i call small government. there are so many people in this country who are not getting by necessarily s not the answer. there are so many people that i income.have no they have no car. where i am right here in is below the weather zero. people are trapped. if they don't have money they can't go out to eat and can't go anywhere. they need is money. they don't need to apply for a job. they need money. if people think that the only work, i'mt money is to sorry, there are other ways of doing it just look at europe and at scandinavia. those countries have solved these problems. poor to go ed the

out and become prostitutes and dealers and drug hat's what is happening in the states. >> do those other countries handle this through increasedst >> do those other countries handle this through increased taxation and then give some type of subsidy to those who need it? >> yes, there is absolutely a redistribution unrelated to labor. that's my key point. in this country is concentration on getting but that's not necessarily going to solve the problem. here are always people who are unemployed and people who are left out that what they need is just get by.to they don't need to start a personal yacht collection but enough to of the wealth andea max well's off facebook says --

>> those topics you can add to those during the remainder of our time. his is john republican line, hi. caller: good morning. good morning. last call tore -- a book called "theroid who proved 60 plus years ago what is happening here and massive debt. margaret thatcher said it best, of othertually run out people's money max and they st andting and borrowing money economic.g the in germany pays

city% to the government because and the ns things quality of everything they do the nually goes down and demand for the people's wealth ie massive goes taxation. >> can i ask you a question. last caller.o the what would you like to see washington? this.ople don't understand they could just read an article called tax cuts and increased revenues. they've always increased revenues every time on the had tax evel we've reform broad based tax reduction economic growth that follows the revenues to the ederal government we should lower them to the point where they don't increase in my opinion. topreforms should be at the of the agenda. this insanity we call our tax biggest drag on our economy and filled with loop holes edaling,

nd subsidities and effects every politicians moral compass. here's brandon costa mesa, california. line.ndent caller: what i would like to know of what if washing could do feel like the biggest thing you could do is prevent happening every rather than involve them after they happen. the economy is the main driving and business is one of the main driving force for fixing things. wish washington would stop regulating so much and maybe let patents come out that would help fix everything. you have to balance the budge and it stop corruption. can generate more money than anything and why not let americans revious that helped inspire and pave the to creater generation

trillions of dollars out of happen.s why does it always classify and ake certain inventions top secret when they're right there in front of us proven to work. understand why something so easy that could solve everything doesn't happen yet are you involved in patent aw or do you follow it out of interest? tom.let's hear from democrats line. caller: good morning, pedro and to you. ew year >> thank you. >> my comments concerns afghanistan. have contracts and mining all the precious minerals in afghanistan. just finished building a over there.bridge so we're withdrawing evidently benefit ge is going to the chinese. $18 billion ought

worth of helicopters from russia afghanistan army. i don't know who they're protecting be themselves from. us.ody is over there but our troops there is going to cost $88 billion. shored up to take care of the veterans and shore security and medicare. we need to quit giving our money keep it here in the united states. >> afghanistan will be our topic look at foreign policy in the year 2014 and address as well. but for now giving you the comment on what would you like washington to do in the year 2014.

we have seen how we phrase it in washing to. blank from in the there. caller: here's what i would like washington do. tomko burn puts out a waste book of what the government is wasting. believe this year it's $25 billion. not nothing about it. i mean, the money is right in to use for things that are our population needs. they have something like 45 job training programs that duplicating themselves and ridiculous funding competence on the sex lives of lobsters or whatever. he goes to the

trouble every year of putting his book outle and neither party addresses it. like to have ould one, they should put one out also. interested to know just a few weeks ago we had program.coburn on the if you have a computer or access invite to you go to the video library. talked about the important thing he found in it >> thank you. congress would act on it >> and that's diane. you can also see other things a network as on this well as our channel 2 and 3 and tv tv and american history as well. c-span.org.und on

let's tell the vet trapbdz trapbz administration at juice from ple americans. they have apple juice with china.rate from the veterans administrationing trying to do the cheapest thing on everything. i know there are some good apple farmers in this country who our be delighted to serve agencies. >> barbara bush in the hospital yesterday with rest tire tore issue. he statement from the former president said she's receiving care according to the brief statement. enneth, over in tennessee, republican line.

see this would like to completely demolished because it will give us nothing reft of ches for the the duration. also see some ways to get him out of office because e's done nothing but get this country in a mess. he don't care. person. for the working ook at unemployed at the low income level. he's n "washington post" takes a look at the cost of medicare as part of their story. talking about spending in particular. medicare spending is for cast to 7% per year because of the aging of the population patient costs.

now it will m amount to $930 billion. wayne, indiana. independent line caller: i'd like to see ashington get back to the ten commandments and bring them back into the school and do what weigh right. laws.'t need them other if you follow the laws of the ten commandments our country to normal again. go the fifth and stuff will away. >> on twitter -- chattanooga, tennessee. democrats line. caller: i just have a couple and then i'll answer

your question. they always talk about working.nt programs not well here i see government programs, social security they of it.ney out medicare. why do you keep taking money out are not ms that working. one more thing, all that money on these bonds, what happened to them? what happened to all that money? did it come out to the people? the private people took the money and put it overseas somewhere. question, what i ant to see in washington, we only have 100 senators in the house but all these people in the house of representatives. let's cut that down to 100. you're talking about smaller government. about that? will that be a smaller you?rnment for is o what the government

do a. d to that? do you focus on >> well i don't know. particular. but just i just heard it alike instance, e guns for here was the ep a was shutting plant.inding into it's cuts that went effect reduce funding by 350 million because of flat budgets since 2011 and the secretter.

>> here's noah from pennsylvania. independent our line ask we're asking folks in 2014, i want washing to, and would you fill in the blank wai don't want it to be abolished.

better ur mind make it >> yeah. > make it better so it can be more affordable. >> are you currently getting a the affordable care act? i'm waiting to see if i can apply for. is up next. he's from carlisle, pennsylvania. democrats line. caller: yes, sir. just like to say very simply that people who want u.s. government, the government under president obama shrunk right there absolute

proof that the private industry an efficient job as the united states government. government workers are hard efficient. they are those people who shea that government does no business, we liz warren to tell us how wonderful business can be run but it's not being run because our government is regulating business efficiently. thank you. >> before you go, do you work know people t or who do? no is no /* no sir i'm a long thyme unemployed person. government; state, ocal and federal and highly qualified heavy equipment

in forklift operations and warehouse. > were you taking unemployment benefits? >> yes, sir. my unemployment ran out. yesterday? >> is no no sir. ago. n out a year carlisle, arl from pennsylvania. there is a story in the "new york times" taking a look at the electronics ch for .hen you cross the border

the rest of the story you can find in the "new york times". more minutes with our questions. republican line. bruce, good morning. caller: good morning. how you doing? fine, thank you. i like to start counting 100 es at a time and not million dollars at a time. messed up there it's ridiculous. why the d do a show on american people do not call their congress people and tell they want to pass or

they pass and use the law used that makes it simple -- i the guy that ds, said, average high school graduate can understand the laws. what they passed and 2010. they have yet to use it. let me ask you, how often do you call your congressman? oh, average about once every two weeks. was lately. 5, 6 years ago i called every week. the merican people are reason we're in the shape we're in. a number of us to call. it doesn't take 50,000. to be millions calling. >> when you call, what kind of get?onse do you

>> one time they said they don't ork for anybody except themselves and david sreuter, i my him to do something for iance couldn't get her unemployment for six weeks. she just got laid off and i raised cane and i got it. done today hing about this. she was about to lose her house. ou know what, next morning the unemployment office down here in louisiana was calling her to get unemployment straight. she had do some sort of appeal. it takes calling your senators representatives. >> that's bruce from loose lou. greensboro, from

north carolina. >> yes. to out lawe for them jerry manner reason. start negotiatingthem to out l reason. i want them to start negotiating them to work on tax reform what?gotiating on >> well, all the issues and problems we have. have several obviously. >> there is a specific one you'd start with? well, we could start with tax reform. negotiate a tax code that a high can understand. oh boy, how simple is that? it's ridiculous. there's probably a book that who pages-tax stuff. not even the accountant can it.rstand it's ridiculous.

>> we'll take one more call on call will bed that francis at water, california. line.rats caller: hello. i just called to say, i don't ven need to say anything probably but i think that i also believe that the wages should be raised because that does help. i happen to be 77 years old and gone through these different ones and every time and the pricesow get high everybody get poor rich. for the already and so one of the best ways to economy would be to have wages raised. a minimum wage raise or wage of 10, $15? not under ten and more than that. it does not hat

hurt business. because how can anybody buy anything from a business if they have money to buy it with? henry ford who said paid very good wages to his workers of them wouldn't buy his cars if he didn't. completely that >> that's the last call. on this new year's day we have up until or you 10 o'clock. u. hear from the former mbassador mark begins beeri bes /* ginsberg. washington journal continues have a this.

> ambassador ginsberg, welcome >> happy new year to you. >> thank you. right back to you. look for the year ahead, as far as foreign policy is what does the obama administration face? oflet's start with secretary state john kerry who is flying middle east to offer unprecedented u.s. bridging facilitate try to the negotiations that he started under his ages between israel and palestine to force a two

solution. as soon as he became secretary of state this became his most commitments and he's been in the region over 11 tiles. time, just next oar syria he catastrophe of is boiling over infecting the entire region. descended into chaos. afghanistan and the trying totes is still negotiate a separation agreement guise of a security agreement which is stalled and therefore prevented the from fulfilling withdrawing t of troops at the beginning of 2014. as you circle further, egypt very difficult removedes of having now president moresy and there is

that has broken out among the brotherhood and then as i look further the most critical important what i would call crucial foreign policy hallenge that the administration faces is taking the spweupl trim agreement that recently states negotiated with its allies with that and ransform translate this so-called 6 month agreement into a permanent one that would effect iran's nuclear weapons them from prevent enriching nuclear material to build a weapon. challenges in r the middle east. if i can go on a bit further, can look at the olympic ames that are coming up, the

violence and terrorism that inflicted itself and challenges in the united states faces the guise of violence and terrorism security. speaking, the national security scandal that has relations and our brazil has ies and a new year's phrase, a terrible hangover on thebilateral relations with allies the spine and eavesdropping has put a cold freeze on relations between the white house and/or very strong germany. cluding >> when it comes to the white secretary kerry so many front open at one time. ow do you manage all that and how do you manage all the front? >> you really need have to a the spine and eavesdropping has put a cold freeze on relations between the strategy to deal with these i look nd frankly when at how secretary of state kerry

shinning star in the cabinet of this administration, you can't help very impressed with the determination and the illingness that he has demonstrated to tackle all these issues and to seize the here at a time when american standing in a world has shall we say nowhere where it should be and frankly a great disappointment o those of us who are deeply concern about the challenges that we face in 2014 where has taken adibility bad hit across the globe. to he ambassador joins us talk about foreign policy to ask if you want 202-585-3880 for democrats. you can send your thoughts on

e-mail at send us c-span.org. what does it mean that some type agreement that hasn't been negotiated and signed yet. has beenal burden here on president karzai. approval with he tribal leaders with afghanistan. is failure to do so is more based on his personal own goals after he leaches will come ncy which none too soon given the fact that as far as i'm concerned he has not been a very good partner for the united states when american troops are in harm's constantly defending

afghanies and remnants of al-qaeda that is still operating in afghanistan. he wants have to the states, whatever remains of the united states, presence under thestan totally control of the afghan 90 government. wants to determine what troops can do o and help them being held the things and all hat prevented by rack from signing a bilateral security security and cause the nited states to walk away and not walk away. arzai is heading in that same direction and given his agenda which is inconsistent with the objectives of the afghan 90 people i think he's eaded for real trouble if he doesn't reach an agreement. >> should the united states riginally was december 31st we'll have to pull everybody out.

oruld they have held to that does now the united states have to negotiate how long they'll have to wait for him to make a decision? there's two ways of looking at this. if you want to be critical of administration, then the administration's basically giving karzai more room to hold the united states hostage. you wants to look at this strategically given the to do rope a dope with foreign d states on policy then we're being the more trategic and more thoughtful because he's erratic look, the taliban has not been at all doubt that nd no whatever element of the taliban

choose whether it's tell kistani or afghan 90 ban afghanistan is not secure. the longest war that the we're states has waged still going to wind leaving fghanistan very insecure, very open to potential territorial and by the taliban terrorism is still in kabuhl and few weeks the last and unfortunately we may have and control mmand in lem of al-qaeda but not any way, shape or form offered enough of an insurance policy or frankly we cannot offer enough an insurance policy to the afgh afgh afghany people if they're not they seem not to be to willing to negotiate a treaty between themselves and the afghany government.

we tried for years to in effect open up back channels to the tal to try to get a peace agreement negotiated between the sides and the taliban see the united states pulling out they see a weak afghany overnment and they don't seem imkleined to negotiate anything and continue to wage their insurgency. >> there is the question what e u.s. has gained from our ars other than eliminating sadaam hussein? >> you can't make this as black twitter alone would not permit us to do that. share the view that iraq was something that has never served american long term foreign policy interests. feel grieved in some respects that many

americans including myself have duped into believing that the over throw of sadaam was going to accomplish so many including the fact that he had weapons of mass out notion which turned to be the case. in afghanistan was something that has never served american long term foreign policy interests. iit's different story. destroy the ect central command of al-qaeda and been on the run. roaches that are found, they hiding places and as 2014, i think it's oing to say it's going to be a for us in ous year he counter terrorism because al-qaeda has rest recollecteded itself that could be as ineatening if not more to us the regions that they have in effect grown again as well as to homeland because of our failure to be able to eradicate

franchise cells nd particularly in syria and l north africa. and >> good morning. caller: good morning. year. new >> happy new year to you. caller: may it be a happy new year. let me ask you this question. how many floors -- how many are there in the building that you're now sitting in? ask? y do you caller: why? if it was built using the standards from the national institute of standards and seven, worldilding flimsy a few s so fires and waste baskets should bring the damn thing down is your question? and n a one story building i have a great deal of

confidence in the polices of city of new york. the knew police commissioner and counter terrorism police force and so i'm quite convinced enormous have done an mount of work to fortify and protect the has been tapbts of the city and made america far as well. >> from california, democrats line, good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to know why the resident is regeging on his promise that we would be out of of 2014.an by the end like to know why? >> it's a great question and i tried to address it, but let me see if i can be more specific. like to know why?ated on >> belaub of the united states that

it would permit forces to afghanies. the afghanistan government has refused to sign a bilateral he rity agreement that himself and his tribal supporters and leaders had a few months ago. and so he's trying to hold the nited states hostage and commanding certain concessions of the united states eptable obama administration is doing its best and right thing to not a self-imposed deadline capacity of nato is the main force left in fghanistan to do its job effectively when american troops pull out. moreit up a constitutional weeks and let's see what

happens. and while the time may have still a few weeks i believe that the president has every intention of fulfilling early in you're on right now. go ahead. if er: okay. i don't know you gentlemen are republican or not. i'm republican myself. i'm native american. want to know what you think about how native american are doing in america and what

guest: whether they're in the military or working on behalf of the u.s. government. no one cares whether a republican or democrat. our job is to do the best job we can as americans to defend them and to do the best thing we can to keep this country secure by keeping politics at the waters edge. that's what i think can best be done to help native americans and everyone else who care about this country. host: this is michael from twitter. do americans understand the tribal culture and history in afghanistan and how it affects

their point of view with relations with the u.s.? guest: it's a great question. the history of afghanistan is complete with countries that invaded it and failed to stabilize it. going back to the chinese and the middle ages. the problem has been and the problem we face is that in each of these countries where we've had global strategic interests, we fail to really understand the tribal nature of these societies and the artificial borders that were drawn up by colonial powers. whether it be iraq. you can look at almost every country in the middle east. , you realize after the empire fail at the end of world war i. most of the countries were artificially created by winston churchill when he was secretary of the navy and his french counterparts. afghanistan is no different.

yes, it's a lesson that has been hard for us to learn whether it's been iraq, syria and afghanistan and we have not been adequately prepared to understand when we involved ourselves with these countries. host: those running for president in afghanistan, do they hold the same views of the u.s. that the current president does or their there are differences? guest: there are strong differences with mr. karzai. there's great deal of disappointment in afghanistan with his leadership and with the corruption around him with his failure to achieve the goals of security that he promised the people of afghanistan. he has not been anywhere shape or form the type of leader that we hoped he would become. no nelson mandela.

he has been a real drag on the capacity of the united states to achieve its goals and while he's been the elected leader of that country, as far as i'm concerned, the sooner he goes, the better and contenders running for president are frankly fed up with him as well. i think that everyone is looking forward to his departure there. host: would you know there's a stand out currently for those running for president? guest: i really don't know yet enough which one will emerge. as twitter said, tribal equities and tribal leader will determine in some respects which candidate emerges rather than the people themselves. host: here's maria from new jersey independent line. caller: i like your comments. ever since world war ii our presidents have put us in a place of great britain around the world.

they agreed to do this. it's being treated as a colony again. the trade agreements are not in our favor. our young men and women are in restricted economically to serve country interests around the world. there will be no end to it until we get back to what our founding fathers said. also would you comment britain, israel and saudi arabia advancing our middle east policy. guest: you really throwing a lot at me so early in the morning on new year's. let me see if i can help tackle some of those great questions and give you an idea. the concern that you have about the fact that we should not have

had george washington's important addage of avoiding foreign -- the united states clearly over extended itself in over many parts of the world in the last 15 to 20 years. particularly since the events of 9/11. we have obviously been -- it's been a very hit and miss foreign policy within the last several administrations whether you're democrat or republican. there's a great deal to look at and great deal to examine and see historically what we may or may not have achieved. economically, the fact of the matter is, the united states is still the most dominant economic force in the world. china obviously is doing everything it can to compete with the united states. europe is facing enormous challenges because of the currency problems. the american dollar is still the reserve currency.

our economy is still depending on the spending and confidence level of the american people and future of our economy. it has much less to do with what is happening in europe and in asia. yet at the same time, you and i know that the greater the deficit and greater deficit spending that we engage in and the more debt that we incur and the more bonds that we sell to countries like china, there's not necessarily help this country achieve confidence and build this country's economic standing back up. that's something obviously what i think the foreign entitlements that you should be most concerned about is the deficit here at home that is causing us to spend so much money to fund our debt abroad. secondly, on the issue of whether britain and israel and saudi arabia control middle east foreign policy, i would say britain least of all have

anything to do or say about foreign policy or the developments in the middle east. saudi arabia is doing everything they can to construct a sunni alliance against iran. israel is facing its own challenge in forges a two state solution with the palestinians. obviously it has great deal concern over iran's nuclear program. the arab world since the arab spring is in turmoil. israel has very little to do to influence that now. host: the framework discussions going on ambassador. the b.b.c. reporting this morning, norwegian and ships waiting to remove chemical weapons, the b.b.c. adding it's signaling a key deadline that will not be met. give us your take what's going on with syria when it comes to chemical weapons? guest: while there's some

elements of the obama administration that has been patting themselves on the back for allegedly achieving a chemical weapons agreement that was largely an accident that helped occur by secretary kerry's statement that resulted in asad agreeing to no longer agreeing to use chemical weapons. the norwegians stepped up to try to help secure complete -- frankly this is merely a technical challenge because of the fight still occurring and making it very difficult for the united states organization and the norwegians to complete the job. this is not because the assad regime to hold on to any morph

its chemical weapons. i wouldn't get too caught up in what's in the chemical weapons point. while assad has given up chemical weapons, he accelerated the civilian casualties on his own people and the influx of al qaeda terrorist in syria created humanitarian catastrophe against the shi'ites. what we have two evil forces fighting with each other and causing great deal civilian harm to so many millions of syrians. host: which means what for the obama administration? guest: 2014 is a challenge to secretary kerry and the white house so see if they can have a geneva peace conference to bring the parties together. i must say all the negotiations are not going to stop what

essentially become the true fault line between now a sunni-al qaeda terrorism fighting force that is determined to fight to the last man against a shi'ite minority regime in syria. this is no longer united states versus al qaeda. this is al qaeda using the age old enemy that exist between sunny and shi'ites to attract a young terrorist to fight on their behalf in order to over throw the assad regime. there's very little the united states can do to stop that. we missed this boat a long time ago. host: here's doug from massachusetts on our democrats line for marc ginsberg. caller: hi. once again when the subject of middle east comes up --

guest: i'm not going to let you get away with that because that maybe your opinion. i like to start off the new year on a positive note and not to have someone call in and throw a lot of brickbacks around. let's just dismiss you. you can write me a nice letter and accuse me of all sort of things. i will take the hits when they're accurate. host: doug you have a question? caller: i do have a question. what your guest wants to do -- the united states of america fought israel's wars. [indiscernible]

guest: thank you very much. as i said, let's at least make sure everyone understands. i'm a proud democrat. i'm a proud liberal democrat who has been very involved in helping to forge a consensus foreign policy with my republican friends over many decades. one thing that i made it very clear is that israel has a strong right for safety and security. it is the majority of most of americans across all spectrums of political persuasions. the one thing that i made it very clear in all of my writings and everything that i believe in is that we americans have much to do to protect our own interests and israel will do everything it can to fight its own interests as long as we have

a strong ally in the united states. most importantly, israel has to make the very difficult decisions that are incumbent on it to forge a negotiated settlement with the palestinians. the palestinians deserve their own state. their own viable state. that's been my position for decades. host: when it comes to the frameworking the way the "new york times" describes, it the core issues to be resolved, the status of jerusalem is a possible capital for the new state as well as israel, israel insist identity of the jewish state be recognized with the palestinian and refugees should have right to return to their former home. talk a little bit what's going

on and prelude to this framework. if i understand correctly, refugees are being released at the same time on the israeli side. guest: you mean prisons are being released. as part of the agreement that secretary kerry negotiated back august, there has been a series of prisoner release that the netanyahu government committed to do. at the same time the netanyahu government has been doing something that has been in effect seen blackmail to its right wing coalition partners by corollating the prison releases with the announcement of new assessment construction. which is frankly it drives nails in the coffin of a palestinian state and a viable two state solution. it's paying ransom to enemy taken a coalition that has no interest in forging a two state solution. this is why the secretary, secretary kerry who's leaving to

the region in a few days, is trying to do the following. one, he wants to help the find the borders of future palestinian state. number two, he is trying to effect make sure that the israelis and palestinians understand the framework should consider undivided jerusalem. number three, the security agreements that israel wishes to maintain on the jordan river valley, which israel considers to be a essential or frankly in my judgment not critical to a two state solution. secretary kerry got his hands full dealing with an israeli government that still has -- is dependent on right wing

coalition. i'm not necessarily convinced mr. netanyahu himself is prepared to negotiate in good faith here. i'm waiting to see what he's going to do when secretary kerry arrives. at the same time, let's be clear that the israelis are entitled to have from the palestinians important concessions as well. they are entitled to have israel recognized as a jewish state. they are entitled to have security guarantees from the palestinians. they are entitled to help ensure that whatever remains of the settlers that refuse to leave on their own are somehow given safe passage if not protected. they are entitled to know that they have a partner that is going to recognize israel's right to exist in secure and safe boundaries and this not be an effect the prelude to a hamas government take over. israel has equities at state and

so do palestinians. host: our guest is former ambassador to morocco and also the ceo of the peace work foundation. guest: one voice movement was sighted individual. his name is daniel lebesky. he had the vision to great framework of the next generation of arabs. the organization with offices in new york, washington, london, palestine and tell aleave, to

convince younger israeli the importance of peace. at the same time, peace works hs a company that was started to help bring palestinians and israelis together to engage in entrepreneurial initiatives, is launching new initiatives in palestinian to provide younger palestinians with new entrepreneurial opportunities to help them understand what a two state solution would bring them in the guise of new economic and opportunities in a country or in a place such as palestine. it's not a country yet which has such huge unemployment rate. we have a staff of approximately 39 in over 6000 youth leaders in both israel and palestine working day in and day out to try to convince israeli and

arabs. host: someone from twitter. while israel keeps building settlement? guest: well the palestinians and the west bank are not firing missiles at israel. it's really the islamic extremist elements in the gaza strip that are under the control of hamas which is determined to destroy any potential agreement between palestinian authority and israel. as you know, our viewers understanding, hamas controls the gaza strip. israel withdrew from the gaza strip was over taken by hamas. the west bank is still under control of the palestinian authority, which is a more

secular organization which entered into the oslo agreement with israel. there is no missells flying there. at the same time, i am totally against sentiment construction. it is destructive to the future of israel and the future of the palestinian state. it is something the israeli government should cease immediately. it does not serve israel's long term interest. it is against anything any of us agree with. prime minster netanyahu cannot have it both ways. you cannot pay off his right wing, offer settlement construction funding and at the same time pretend to be negotiating a true viable agreement with the palestinians. it's almost as if you're asking a fox to go into the hen house and determine how many hens are there for him to consume. host: here's pat from orlando,

florida, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call and happy new year. i love c-span. my comment would be, i don't think we'll ever get settled over there in the middle east because there's just too many fires to put out. they have a president without a backbone. saying that, i would like for them to really get to bottom of this benghazi thing. i think it's ferocious that haven't got to the bottom of it yet. it's been almost two years. good men were killed over there. guest: may i pick up your question? i feel passionately and i understand your great question about benghazi. let me see if i can put this into an answer that helps you understand where i'm coming

from. ambassador chris stephens was a friend of mine. i have great admiration and respect for the foreign service. what happened in benghazi was a terrible blow to everything that those of us who serve the u.s. diplomacy stand for. the real concern that i have here is that ambassador stephens was not provided the security support that he needed from the management bureau of the state department. i'm talking about the people who are the career civil servants and foreign service officer who determined that libya in their own bureaucrat i can mold did not determine that libya did not qualify for more security despite the urgent calls of chris stephens regional security officer. that's the real scandal here. it's not whether or not susan rice or anyone else knew who actually attacked the consulate

in benghazi. i think it's quite clear it was an islamic extremist organization. it me it makes no difference that it has the name of al qaeda. the accountability what happened in benghazi goes back to the people who run the management in the state department and control the funding of the security enhancement. host: ambassador do you agree with the assessment in the "new york times" took what happened in benghazi? guest: the "new york times" assessment missing the whole point. whether or not there was a video that provoked the attack, i'm convinced that susan rice did not do anything wrong here. should never have been crucified the way she was politically as a result of her statements. i know susan and she's a terrific person. she never would have done anything intentionally to harm

u.s. policy interest. at the same time, the fact of the matter is, ambassador stephens who knew benghazi well and who understood the difficulties over there, went to benghazi and was attacked by an islamic extremist organization, a military force that we knew existed in benghazi. i think the "new york times" basically misses the whole point in the article about resurrecting whether or not in the end it was a video or it was a islamic extremest organization. the culpability issue is still at stake. the people responsible is still in their jobs. host: now from georgia independent line good morning. caller: good morning ambassador. i'm a vietnam veteran and marine. i have predictions ever since after vietnam. i will skip that and go to my

next one. in seven years we've been involved in conflict the pacific rim. we'll have to many forces there to keep everything in check. nobody there has a military to really go against china. my prediction is that we would be drained so much locally in our own country that we will not have a resource to do this. we will leave this country very vulnerable. we're going to spend four to six trillion dollars on iraq and afghan veterans in their lifetime. that's money that got to be borrowed. we need to let these countries pay for us being there. guest: i'm sorry i didn't get around in our survey around the world. today, the leader of north korea gave his new year speech and i

was watching kim jong-un earlier this morning. the gentlemen point was well taken. there are significant island territorial disputes broken out among all our allies in the region in are not confronting each other. north korea versus japan, japan versus china. china versus the philippines and vietnam. the united states has really no dog in that fight other than the fact that when china threatens japan, obviously we have an important security bilateral defense agreement with japan. there's a real chance here and it's something we have to keep our eyes on that these little silly islands that have no inhabitants have become the potential for being a 1914 world war i repeat all over again where countries tumble into a conflict because no one was able

to negotiate resolution of these island disputes. that's enormous challenge and enormous danger for the united states in the pacific. i agree, if we're going to deploy our fleet to try to prevent these countries from going to conflict, i'm not necessarily convinced the chinese have our best interest at hand here. vice president biden just traveled to beijing to try to see if he can reduce tensions with the china over these island disputes. i'm not sure that he's done what he wanted to do but he certainly tried his best. these disputes have the potential of dragging us into a conflict more than taiwan. host: this is pat from pittsburgh, pennsylvania democrats line. caller: happy new year everyone. i have to tell you mr. ginsberg, your deceit is monumental. if you know anything about the state of israel and the

influence that the state of israel has directly in our state department. i know this for a fact because my friend is a council general and came back to the united states. went to the u.s. department and was aghast at the number of offices. what has essentially turned into an electronic fortress on behalf of the israeli government. the israeli going up to american diplomats returning from the mideast snatching documents from their hand as if they represent the united states. for you to sit there and say that israel had no initial information about benghazi is like saying, israel didn't know about 9/11. guest: you're off on a tirade here about benghazi and israel

is no connection. it's something that goes to what essentially is the type of conspiracy theories that those of us in foreign policy who care about american foreign policy first and foremost have long heard about the critics of israel are always there to try to accuse them of controlling u.s. foreign policy. i suspect if you went to john kerry or susan rice or henry kissenger or any one of the leaders of foreign policy, you would know that there's been enormous disagreements. in effect, within the obama administration in the first half of the obama administration, the relationship between the prime minster of israel and the president of the united states could not have been more challenging and more difficult. that's the record. unfortunately, your record does not prove that it has

substancuation given just what happened in at the beginning of the obama administration. host: kenneth from morgantown, kentucky, independent line. caller: i'm 70 years old. i have seen combat. that's not the point. since world war ii, america has never fought for freedom, in my opinion. it's always fought for the rich man's way of life and the corporations benefit. everywhere they put boots on the ground, i guarantee you there's other resources or pipeline they got to put in. since the citizens of america and i was in combat did not benefit from any combat since world war ii, i think corporations and the rich elite should pay for all the wars we

go to. guest: sir, first of all thank you for your service. my father too was a veteran of world war ii and unfortunately he survived the landing enormity. the commitment of the great generation that gave us, that is my generation the opportunity to be able to become great americans in our own right. not that i consider myself one but one who aspires to be better. are proud of having people like you who given us this great country and defended us in world war ii. let me try to be quick about your point. the fact of the matter is that throughout the history of american military involvement since world war ii, we've had the korean war, we've had the vietnam war. obviously afghanistan obviously iraq. we've deployed troops in other places.

we defended berlin. we've had to deal with the cold war which we ultimately were able to in effect achieve great results under president reagan which in effect brought down the berlin wall. we americans have lots to be proud of. we realized we've made some really bad mistakes since world war ii. your point is well taken that when we put americans in harms way, it should be basically not to fight someone else's conflict but basically to fight what is best and foremost to defend americans from any threats abroad. that should be our watch word or mantra, that is my ideology. host: pew research put out a poll of foreign policy goals. most of those responding said that it should be protecting u.s. from terrorist attacks.

at the bottom of that list, only 18% said promoting democracy in other nations. what do you think about the fact that so few responded to that topic? guest: pedro how can we blame a war weary fatigued america that fought since 9/11. so many veterans who had terrible injuries, emotional and physical. so much money and treasure that has been lost. americans are tired of conflict. they realized that the homeland will never be secure unless we focus our attention what is essentially the threats from terrorism abroad. over throwing regimes is not going to get us very far. obviously we've proven that how wrong we were in engaging in the war in iraq. how can any of us blame the americans for feeling the way we do? i said time and again to audiences around the country,

when asked how many americans oppose iran nuclear program, all hands go up. when i ask how many americans are willing to send their young men and women to fight iran against the nuclear program, you can be very certain, very few hands will go up. it's a message that all of us need to understand. while we talk the talk against irans nuclear program, no president, whether democrat or republican, has the american people behind them in going into another conflict when the american people themselves don't understand what is the true threat to the homeland of iran nuclear program. it is a regional threat no doubt. iran represents a regional threat to american interests, to our allies. americans are war weary. i understand where that poll resulted the way it is. host: jerry from baltimore, maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. happy new year.

mr.ginsberg, thank you for your service and really appreciate you taking all of these jabs from some of these extreme people here in america. i hope the obamacare will provide more mental health so people can have a reason -- guest: it goes with the territory. caller: understand. regarding china and southeast asia, president kennedy when he ran back in 1959, he talked about how we have to be militarily strong and economically strong otherwise we're going to be losers i guess in that great race. i see something like what happening to america now with everything a consumer buys, which is 70% of our economy, is

now made in china. how can we have an effective foreign policy without a good trade or economic policy? where at least 50% of all consumer goods have to be made here or at least limit the influences especially if we can't get other governments like china to stop manipulating their current. host: go ahead ambassador. guest: jerry your point again goes back to the heart and soul of what makes this country great and what we need to do to protect the middle class of this country and to provide them the economic opportunity that is now missing. obviously, the escalating deficit, the debt we've incurred with china. the fact there's such

partisanship in washington. once upon we balanced our budget. once upon a time it wasn't just the stock market doing well, but the incomes of average americans was going up and college tuition was going down and healthcare costs were not escalating. the middle class in this country is being squeezed from all ends. for those of us who are middle class folks, i come from a low and middle class family myself, my father worked hard. he was a tailer in a clothing salesman. i was fortunate i was able to get to where i got to because of the sacrifices of my family. now i'm watching the challenges of caring for elderly parents dealing with our children who are not able to find jobs and we look at the growth of china, we look at the debt that we're incurring with china and we realize those of us who understand little bit about economics, that until we get our

deficit under control. think about it, americans don't think this deficit is something theoretical. for every dollar that we have to pay to service the debt that we have to borrow in order to pay our bills, that's one dollar that's being taken out of funding research, funding jobs here, funding programs that benefit americans. or giving them a tax break if the dollars come back. why is it so hard for us to understand that deficit is taking money out of average american's pockets. even if 20 cents went to government programs and 80 cents went back into marine pockets. that's lot better than funding a deficit. host: this is a republican line. caller: good morning. i would like to comment on the prior caller that referred to

mr. ginsberg as a zionist. what i didn't like about that he made it appear some sort of criminal act to be a zionest or it's some sort of character flaw. when all countries have are promoted and supported. i see nothing wrong with israel promoting its brand just like any other country. wouldn't you have the same concerns for england, germany and etcetera. of course, i have to take issue with that. i have to ask him why does he single out israel for promoting its brand and garnering support? regarding mr. ginsberg, personally i find him very refreshing. he's very knowledgeable. he seems to be someone that his interest is in advancing the

ball rather than just status quo, his ideas are sound. they are precise and i thank you very much for your input this morning. i do appreciate it and thank you c-span. guest: thank you very much, my mother will be very happy to hear the kind accolades on new year's day. one thing that we americans sometimes miss -- look i have a record, i was raised in the middle east. i was brought up in israel, egypt, jordan and lebanon as a young man. i come to understand the arab world and have great deal of concern for young arabs who want to have peace and security and great relations with the united states. i also am strong defender of israel's right to exist. i made it very clear. there's a significant differences between u.s. and

israel's foreign policy. i oppose a lot of netanyahu's foreign policies that has been inconsent with american goals and objectives in the middle east including his failure to negotiate a peace agreement with israel. his determination to oppose an interim negotiation with iran. these are things that are important to americans and frankly, his bellicose statements on the iran negotiations trouble me. i would rather see what we can achieve through negotiations than just in effect let middle east countries drag the united states into a conflict before we are able to determine what's in our own best interest. host: ambassador we'll take up the segment later on in the program. quick thoughts about what's going on in russia. particularly deals with security with the up coming sochi games? guest: we must all understand whether we like mr. putin or not, russia has faced its own islamic extremism from the

caucuses. a foundation and hot bed of al qaeda like extremism. the attacks in volgograd are trying to disrupt the olympic games. this is their 9/11 type of attacks. they're not the only attacks. there has been talks in st. petersburg and moscow. despite our strong disagreements with mr. putin, i find many of his policies contemptible to the united states, we should have sympathy to the russian people who face their own al qaeda islamic extremist on their own doorsteps. as we faced in yemen and 9/11. host: on first day of the year,

ambassador marc ginsberg happen new year. guest: happy new year. thanks to all who called in. great comments and may be not so great comments. everybody had a good time and happy new year to all. host: coming up on the program, we are going to talk about 2014 in terms of year in politics. shane goldmacher will talk about battles on the capitol hill for the 2014 midterm election. later on as you birdie the ambassador reference, security in russia, russian expert jeffrey mankoff will join us. first on this new year's day, we get a news update from nancy. >> happy new year pedro. it's 8:44 a.m. eastern time on this new year's morning. there's more on u.s.-israeli relations. the new ' is bringing new appeal for the release of jonathan poller a prison spy. the petition has been signed by israel's lawmakers.

he has been eheld in the united states for more than 28 years after being arrested by fbi agents in 1985. jonathan pollard is serving life in prison for passing u.s. secrets to israel. changes in many areas go into effect as the new year begins including the g.e.d. test which has been the brand name for high school equivalency exams. the test is designed to make it more rigorous. tomorrow the upgrade g.e.d. exam will be offered in several states and the associated press says it's beginning of a new era in adult education testing. this from the chronicle of philanthropy. donations were up in 2013 with the nation's wealthiest donors giving more than $3.4 billion to charity. the analysis of the year's top gifts also finds that there were more gifts of $100 million or

more than in 2012. in 2013, there were 15 publicly announced gifts of at least $100 million. the largest donation of 2013 coming from facebook founder mark zuckerberg and his wife. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> i've been in involved in politics for four years. i worked on reagan 1976 and 1980 campaign. i have never seen so many people quoting and waving around the declaration of independence and the constitution. many of you, ten years ago, you never gave it a second thought. now i bet it's at the front of your minds. it is with tens of millions of us. the fact of the matter is, tens of millions of us love this country. we don't want it fundamentally transformed. we have to get to as many of the people we can.

wake them up and educate them. the truth is, i'm not trying to pat myself on the back, that's the purpose of this book, i can see it part of the purpose of my radio programs. >> sunday, best selling author, lawyer, reagan administration official and radio personality mark levin will take your calls and questions in-depth. live for three hours starting at noon eastern. book tv's in-depth, the first sunday every month on c-span two. >> we bring public affairs event from washington directly to you. white house events, briefings and conferences and offer gavel to gavel coverage of the u.s. house. all as a public service. where c-span created by the cable tv industry 34 years ago and funded by your local cable

or satellite provider. now you can watch us in hd. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now to talk about political stories to watch in 2014, shane goldmacher of national journal. he is their congressional correspondent. good morning help new year. when it comes to the agenda when congress gets back in session, what's on the list? guest: they are coming back. they are coming back after three years of the at least productive legislative work in congressional history. there's a lot on their agenda. unfinished business. the first thing the senate will be taking up, is the effort to reextend unemployment insurance which expired at the end of this last year. 1.3 americans lost their long term unemployment insurance. democrats trying to push to reextend. they will be taking up confirmation of janet yellen as

the next chairwoman of the federal reserve. she will be the first woman to hold that post. because he rewrote the filibuster rule, she's almost guaranteed to be confirmed. they took the key procedural vote. in the house, it's not clear what the house will do. really they've been playing defense. they want to avoid the democratic agenda and president obama's agenda to be put in place. they want to fight against any expansion of obamacare and they want to win political points so they can take back the senate in 2014. host: talking specific about that. because we have midterm elections. what is the track record of congress actually accomplishing things in midterm election years. guest: it's tougher. the political environment currently made it harder. typically the focus has been the general election. folks don't want to do a lot leading. to the general. that's no longer where most

members of congress fear their future. they fear future in primaries. fem -- that moves up the election calendar earlier. those primary elections begin as early as march. for some lawmakers it is already the middle of campaign season. they are seasoning owl mail -- sending out mailers. host: as far as turning the health of the senate, when it comes to elections. what's the chances of change or shrinking russias between democrats and republicans? guest: in the house of representatives, the republicans is feeling comfortable. they hold a 17 seat majority. in the senate, the democrat have a five seat majority. they have to lose five seats to bring it to a even tie and six for the republicans to take control. it's possible but there are enough democratic house seats

that are competitive next year. it would require republicans to almost sweep the map. sweep six of the seven most contentious race. that's a tough task. given this fall, the healthcare law stumbled, the -- host: shane goldmacher unemployment benefits couldn't happen at the end of last year. what is the back and forth wrangling between democrats and republicans? guest: when paul ryan and patty murray struck a deal in the congress first bipartisan budget, this is something they left off the table. something the democrats wanted and the republicans said no to. the democrats are a little unhappy about that. there's very little they have they can do to force this on

republicans. the next pressure point in the congress, which is really the only time they get work done facing a deadline, that's coming in february, when we again hit a debt ceiling. where the government needs to borrow money to pay its bills. that comes february 7th. it's a soft deadline. we hit that and there's extraordinary measures that become ordinary the treasury secretary can do to extend that limit. after february 7th, that's going to be the next pressure point. the problem for democrats, they don't have a lot of leverage over republicans. host: we're talking about a wide range of political stories here with shane goldmacher. if you want to ask questions he brought u p, here's a chance to do so. give us a call, 202-585-3881 for republicans, 202-585-3880 for democrats and 202-585-3882 for independents. if you want to tweet your

questions you can e-mail us. the debt limit, it's never about the debt limit. it's the philosophy behind the debt limit. what's going to be on the table as far as discussions and negotiations are concerned? guest: the big fight that happened last fall was tied to both the debt limit as well as funding the government. funding the government is happening. that budget deal we just discussed. that's going to be in place. in january, that shouldn't be a problem. the real question are republicans chasing from the government shutdown that hurt them so much politically they don't want to make a big fight about the debt limit in february. they are looking for some kind of small fraction they can take and walk away and tell the republican base, we fought for something. but the leadership of the party doesn't want to force another brinkmanship show down. that's not what the members of

congress want. is there going to be movement from below that happened last fall pressures them into a more a brinksmanship show down, it's possible. host: where is that movement coming from? guest: last fall it came from republican activist. ted cruz galvanized. also throughout the august recess, conservative activist led by former senator jim demint traveled around the country to funnel anger with obamacare. now that law is in place. today about six million american have health insurance that wouldn't otherwise, two million to the obamacare exchanging, about four million through expanded medicaid. that fight is going to keep happening. the law is in place now. it's not clear whether there's a momentum for another big fight in february.

host: there was a story on the hill, the headline said, tea party faces 2014 challenge. in its story it says speaker john boehner who repeatedly ripped into outside conservative groups over attacks of the government shutdown fight. how does what happened last year, especially this tactic he took affect what goes on? guest: there's a fascinating dynamic with the speaker. he has two different audiences he needs to please. audience is the conservative house of representatives, last year conservatives nationally took a beating during that shutdown. it helps cement support in his own caucus. they are happy for his leadership. they are happy he was down in the trenches fighting with them. he won some loyalty going into 2014. he's hoping his troops will stick with him. in the last few years, they haven't been there for him.

after that big fight, he's built up conservative conference who were worry of him. you saw in december, he blasted outside conservative groups. he's willing to spend that political capital and say i got power now. host: your colleague albert a, said john boehner had the best year in washington. guest: within his own conference, he emerged stronger this january than he was last january. nationally, house republicans brand has been soiled. there are a lot of political problems and frankly it's been great that healthcare that was completely broken in most of october and november that helped the republican party recover from the shutdown. within his own conference, he has more support now. host: shane goldmacher of national journal on the first day of the year. here is tom lafayette, california republican line, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call.

i just want to challenge on republicans in the senate. my thought is, three democrats, montana, south dakota and west virginia. i don't think the democrats were competitive there. republicans pick up three seats. then there's three more seats that are in doubt. it's north carolina and arkansas. then it seems to me there's four or five others. they are democratic seats very competitive. it seems your guest doesn't believe the republicans have a chance of taking over the senate. i think it will be done easily. i like your opinion on that. guest: few things, one of the three states you said that are already off the table for the democrats. one of them is montana. the current senator max baucas

will be resigning and taking the ambassadorship to china. the governor who's a democrat there, is likely will replace him with a fellow democrat, which will give them a huge advantage going into 2014. they're going to be running an incumbent. that's a huge advantage. it shifted the state from being something that was really tough for democrats to a toss up. you're right, the playing field in 2014 is almost all democratic seats. if you look at the ten most competitive seats next year, this year now, ache of them are held by the democrats. yes, they are on defense all across the country. but, you have to remember, to when that still republicans have to win six of those eight democratic rates and hold two seats on the table. host: glenn from chicago on the democrats line.

caller: good morning. i have a question. i'm aware of the fact that the benefits for unemployment will be the situation. the food stamp program and i want to know -- i have a friend that owns several day care centers. he depend on his partner to help the kids so they can pay their way to day care. [indiscernible] guest: one of the big questions we didn't talk about in 2014 how congress will deal with the farm bill. which contains all the food stamp legislation. that's on the docket in january. right now we're under emergency extension, a 30 day extension. they are hoping to hammer that out in january. the real question how deep does congress cut food stamp program. house republicans proposed cutting about $4 billion over the next ten years.

not necessarily through straight cuts but sort of making it more difficult to qualify for the program. sort of strengthening background checks and the likes. that's one of the issues democrats has been fighting. it looks like they're moving towards a middle ground. there will be cuts to food stamps but it won't be quite as deep. host: jose from independent line miami. caller: good morning. i know there's a lot of talk about the fact that boehner stand up for the budget deal. there are a lot of hope that people they will be able to bring up the legislation for immigration this year. is there any chances for him to do so given the primary coming up? guest: you know, speaker boehner is really the person to watch on this debate. a bill has cleared the senate. it has to come up in the house. he's played coy with this.

he made no indications of taking it up. he talked about breaking up a large bill into smaller pieces and taking pieces that republicans like. at the same time, he's made no legislative movement he's given some hints to immigration and the white house has an interest in this. they hired a woman last fall to spearhead immigration for him and used to for john mccain who led the last immigration push. there's questions if you just simply flirting with the democrats and the white house enough so they don't hammer republicans for next year. people don't know. the thing is, yes, the speaker took up budget legislation in the last year that was passed by quite a few democrats. at the end of the day that must pass legislation. you need a budget to fund the government. he doesn't need to have

immigration reform come up. host: one time the senate wanted a big deal, the house wanted a piecemeal deal. there's a lot internally that changed as far as the ground concerning getting immigration bill done. is that right? guest: does speaker boehner want immigration bill. there's a lot of belief among republican strategist, the republican party needs to address this issue. there's a perception they are the white only party. they are not pro-latino, they are not pro legal immigration and bringing people into the tent of america. most strategist think boehner fall into that camp. how deeply is that camp is he. is he in the camp that buck his own conservatives that want no part of an amnesty bill. host: we saw this approach back with the bush administration. guest: it's the question what

is the a.? the days after mitt romney's loss where he won the highest percentage of the white vote of any republican of ronald reagan and still lost the election. there was a discussion among the republican party. we got to do something. we can't be winning more and more of the white vote. speaker came out and talked about and we want immigration over haul right in the days after the election. that sort of people think that's where he is politically. a question of can he move his members there. the speaker has not gone out in front of the caucus often. he make she's both leading his conference but not getting too far ahead. host: what about nancy pelosi? guest: she wants to change the immigration laws. she wants to bring the people who are here into some kind of legislatization system. harry reid in the senate is that too. a bipartisan bill passed in the senate.

republicans control the floor. host: as far as fallout, washington times highlight the story about marco rubio, saying he was changing position on immigration. they think tarnished his image. guest: 2013 is over. that couldn't have come soon enough for marco rubio. he had a rough year. it shows one of the challenges, not a lot of people from the congress typically become presidents. at the beginning of the year, he was talking top tier 2016 presidential tenure. he was part of that gang of eight that put together the immigration bill. he was the leader politically out front and he got the got the bill through the senate. what has he got for it? he got anger from the republican base and he backed ted cruz and other hard line republicans over

the shutdown. he's been in a political noman's land. you got a couple years and when you're in washington, people think 2016 matters now. it probably doesn't. the regular activist who still think he's a well spoken, smart, great representation of the republican party. he did have a tough 2013 and immigration is one of the reasons. host: shane goldmacher joining us from the national journal. thomas from providence, kentucky, you're up next from the independent line. go right ahead. caller: i was calling about the obamacare. it seem like to me, that the republican wanted to do something, they will come up with alternative program to

obama care. guest: conservatives put together a package of their own. it's hard to come up to an alternative to a law that's getting so much attention. as a republican senator from wisconsin, a blue state but republican elected in the 2010 tea party wave, ron johnson. he said as of january 1st, obamacare is not just a piece of paper we can repeal and pull away. about six million people now are going to have health insurance because of this law. republicans alternatives, they're going to have to come up with way to keep people to have insurance. there's a long history and behavorial checks, once people have something, they don't want it taken away. now they have the health insurance, it's going to be very hard to come up with alternatives. host: 48 plus votessent affordable care ssent -- votes on the affordable care act last

year. guest: absolutely. partly it's the republican base. republicans can't afford to be seen by their own primary voters as doing anything but pushing for a full repeal. there's a tough senate race in georgia going to be an open seat. it's one of the two democrats is hoping to go after. one of the republicans there, came out and suggested, this obamacare law, i voted for repeal, let's just try to fix the problems. that's the focus. he was hammered. he was hammered by conservatives in his own state. he quickly came out and said, never mind, i just want repeal. forget fixing it. everybody running for senate there is saying full repeal. as long as that's the dynamic in the republican party, you're going to keep seeing those votes. conservatives continue to want to prove themselves. host: shane goldmacher you were talking about the outside groups. how can the mainstream gop complain when outside groups

have always been the inside groups. guest: one of the ironies, these outside groups mostly located in washington d.c., you saw that during the government shutdown. one of the big groups pushing it, was the heritage foundation and president jim demint. he got that support by traveling around the country. those outside groups are based in washington. they are trying to represent that anger, that populous frustration among conservative activist that led to the tea party rise in 2010. host: these outside groups will be involved in primary process themselves? guest: absolutely. if you look last year. more than half dozen conservatives are looking at other challenging setting republican senators or running a tea party republican in open seats. you can see each cycle that republican party and the senate has become more conservative because the republicans, not in

number, but in sort of temperament and ideology has moved to the right. you can see that again in the coming year. host: jack from california on democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. happy new year to both of you. my question is about the unemployment benefits. why is that when it comes to extending unemployment benefits, we got to find funds for it. when it comes to giving tax cuts and subsidies to the millionaires and billionaires, nobody come up with where we got to come up with pay for that. thank you c-span. guest: one of the big challenges with the unemployment issue is the economy as a whole is growing pretty rapidly. you see the stock market had best year sense the mid-1990s. saw the economic growth rate in the 3rd quarter was fastest in

many years. a lot of people are being left behind. people most left behind are the long term unemployed. yes, when it comes to congress, they talk about coming for what they call pay fors, ways to account for the money that will cost to give those people support. these are the folks that are being left behind in this economic turn around, is the people who hasn't had a job for a long i'm and can't find one. you get stigma and depressed. it's tough to be unemployed for a long time. those are the folks facing the deepest cuts. host: lynchburg, virginia, this is where edward is. he's joining us on the republican line. caller: all the issues being

addressing what i'm saying, they're talking about downsizing our military while iran and north korea is working to build a military, china is working on three aircraft carriers. if iran decides to go at israel and israel say we're not going to wait for the united states, we will prevent them from atomic bombing. with all the rhetoric going ongoing back from pearl harbor and 9/11. we're vulnerable to lot of attacks. if we don't have the strengths to reduce the obamacare, ronald reagan said the best way to defend yourself, is to have a strong defense. our government is spending $1.5 billion to egypt while we're downsizing our military putting ourselves in jeopardy. guest: one of the big issues on the defense front is that this law called sequestration, which

is capping government spending, takes a hit to the defense program. after a years of expansion during iraq war and post 9/11. you know what, for conservatives, what they have in this budget deal just passed the house in december and the senate, trying to soften some of the cuts. yes it will take cut backs, for the defense and the congress, john mccain and lindsey graham, it's not enough. host: so 2014, what are the races to watch? guest: i think the chief races to watch are the senate races. there's going to be one house race in florida, special election in a quintessential swing district. it gets a lot of attention when it comes up. democrats think if he can win, it's going to show they have momentum going into the fall races. typically election years get a

lot of attention. it's a seat opens up because of the passing of a long time republican congressman. there's the senate races. who's going to control the senate, if we're still talking about the races that one of those earlier callers said, if you're talking about west virginia in early october, democrats are doing well. those are the tough ones. the issue will come down to louisiana and north carolina. those are the key races you got two southern incumbent democrats, mary and kay hagan. those are the races to watch. host: what make both of those women vulnerable?

guest: for mary it's a tough state. president obama is deeply unpopular in large south including her state. that's issue number one is the president and it's healthcare law. they poll very poorly in louisiana. in north carolina, north carolina is moving to be a solid swing state. it is the state obama won in 2008, he lost it last cycle. it's still a conservative state. kay hagan's job is to try to not run as a generic democrat but run as a kay hagan democrat. to run from something different. host: the washington times highlights the house side, former ms. america is running

for the house seat there. guest: it's one those primary races. it's in illinois. there's a lot of these primary challengers. it's not clear how serious the candidate she is. she certainly has an interesting biography. host: here's edward from lynchburg, virginia, republican line. guest: my concern again and i -- host: edward sorry about that. caller: i like to request our guest pick of the top two or three feel good topics. substantial cooperation from both sides of the aisle in producing legislation. host: is there sentiment from the budget deal that could play over as far as the ability to

work together this year? guest: that's the thing i would talk about, when you're talking diplomacy, it's called confidence building measures when two sides agree to set down to share a meal. to do something really basic. that's kind of what the republicans and democrats did in december. they agreed to set a budget for the government. that's not that much to celebrate. it's still unusual. the fact they did it, is a positive sign. the democrats brought their votes along and republicans brought their votes along. it was a confident building measure for the congress. does that carry over? it's not clear. it's going to be hard to come up with feel good measures that the congress will pass by every measure over the last three years has been the least productive legislatively in decades. you're not looking at bigger laws coming about in a big year. the third of them are running

for reelection. host: talk about tactics. one of the thing that happened, they lowered the bar. they said we're not going to get a deal and we will lower the bar and move forward. guest: couple things they will do is talk about farm bill negotiators has been working more than a year. they are hoping to pass a farm bill in january. this will be a confidence of measure. democrat and republicans coming together to pass legislation. that's one issue. another one is there's a broad budget deal. the congress have an interesting process. those committees are busily working on that. democrats are pushing for a january 15 deadline. you could be looking at two month period where congress passes three things of bipartisan. these are the basics. the farm bill expired a long time ago. it needs to be renewed. budget is sort of top line

figure. not the biggest challenge. that said, they have haven't been happening. if it is happening, it is a good sign for the two sides to cooperate. they're not talking about any big issues on both sides. host: does congress care they get the label of do nothing congress? does it bother them? guest: it doesn't bother speaker boehner. he said don't judge us by the number of laws we passed, judge us by what we're able to repeal. in perspective, if you're a republican, you represent one-half of one third of the federal government. what do you want to do, you want to prevent the other people passing the things you don't like. for them, that is a success. blocking things they don't approve of, that is as far as their agenda is going to get. between the pressures for republican primary voters that don't want them to stray far from the line and reality the democrats control most of the

government, republicans has been pretty pleased to sit back and say, let's not big things happen. host: cindy from ohio democrats line. good morning. you're on good morning. caller: good morning to you. happy new year. i got one thing that's been perplexing me. i don't understand why it seems that the people that have lost so much during the financial melt down and are still struggling. i mean struggling and still losing and it's great if people were having their jobs. for a lot of us it's not. i want to know if anyone is going to be held accountable for this? this is just not right. it seems like it's off the backs of us out here that had nothing to do with all of this.

guest: democrats are hoping to build on in 2014. maybe legislatively and politically. the president has given lot of indication that 2014 will be focused on issues of income inequality. he hinted that's going to be a major issue in the state of union. it played a huge role in the election of mayor of new york. the fat cat bankers got ahead and everybody else is left behind. one of the other issues is raising the minimum wage. democrats talking about potentially trying to raise the minimum wage by as much as $3 from $7.25 to more than $10. the president will push it during the state of the union. he did it last year but he didn't follow through. democrats in the congress think this is a great issue for them. both republicans and democrats and especially independent support hiking the minimum wage.

yes you're talking about addressing some of the people left behind. it's driven a little bit of washington by the politics. host: especially goes to one of those safety net programs which always seen push back from republicans especially when democrats bring it up. guest: absolutely. one of the sort key issues between republican party and democratic party, democrats has been pushing to basically create a deeper, thicker and stronger safety nets. republicans has been, you know what this is something the private sector can take care of. it's one of the sharp contrast between two parties. each side think they will win politically. they bring it up in key midterm years. last big push was in 2006. host: andy from lafayette, indiana independent line, you're on with shane goldmacher, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you so much for taking my

call. i'm an independent. i voted for obama the first time. i didn't the second time. i'm a little bit concerned with this obamacare. i got friends who work in the medical field losing their jobs. i had friends had regular jobs being reduced to less than 30 hours. i had friends who had good insurance now being rolled over automatically into obamacare. it seems this law is not good for america. we are now divided nation, poor against rich, republicans against democrats. i wish that the president will lead by example. reach across the aisle and become the president he needs to become. i'll hang up and listen to your answer. host: shane goldmacher back in december, you wrote a poll taking a look at america's

relations between president and congress. he tried to make improve those relations? guest: what the caller is talking about is that there's a division here. if you look at the healthcare law and polling, democrats think it's a good thing, republicans think it's a terrible thing. one of the sort of interesting things if you look back at the obama presidency, it's his decision to push through this healthcare law with only democratic votes. really reshaped the history of his white house. what it's meant, republicans have had no skin in the game. all they wanted to do was attack the law because none of them voted for it. it's a remarkable development, a program this big sort of rewritten social fabric of the country, really passed along party lines. republicans felt alienated. they have felt no sort of investment. we'll see if that changes.

how do the dynamic change now that this is in effect. people are getting insurance. it's not clear what's going to change. what you have is a law that's been deeply devicive. as a result, you got people -- host: during the shutdown you had president having dinner with republicans to build relations. you see more of that going in the new year especially with immigration as he tries to get the things done? guest: the president made a big push last year to develop relationships with republican senators. he's reworking his white house team to change his relationship with the hill. he's put into place a woman who used to work for senator schumer and chief liaison with the hill. she's somebody widely respected by both democrats and republicans. there's a lot of things he can

do to you're his relationship with the hill. there's a lot of complaints they don't hear from the presidents. he had bunch of dinners with republicans through the spring and summer. what came out of it, it was the worst government shutdown in years. host: here's william from west point, mississippi, democrats line. caller: thank you, happy new year. like to say that i don't know why we're spending so much time on obamacare. i just don't understand that. to me, every time you turn around the republicans are constantly repealing or going against something. we should be working together as a team. then i look at -- i want to say this, i had friends that went bankrupt because of the fact

that they was dealing so hard with their medical bills. the kids had a preexisting, insurance kicked them out, even at our church, we had to take up money to try and help them. the republicans make it seem like it's so bad. i really wish they would get on board and help us out here that are poor. then to say that well, we are not going to extend unemployment. i don't understand that. guest: william is talking about the divisions we are just talking about. one of the low examples of how divide this congress is and how hard it is to get things done. talking about senator max baucas is going to be new ambassador to china. he's chair of the most powerful senate in the committee. max baucas is leaving the senate despite the fact he talked for years about reforming the tax code. he's a willing republican

partner in the house. they've been traveling the country last year. he's leaving. he doesn't think tax reform will have a chance. this is a congress really -- they are looking at any kind of major legislative achievements in the coming year. anything that happen big, immigration, it will be a big surprise for most folks. host: one more call, jerry from tampa, florida, independent line. caller: happy new year. i like to ask shane, does he think republicans by choice or by lack of knowledge. don't understand that the a.c.a. is their healthcare plan came out of the heritage foundation in the 1990's in opposition to hillary care. guest: there's no question, the policy underpinning the affordable care act or obamacare

came from conservative think tanks in the 1990's. the idea of requiring vegetables to buy health insurance. that was a original conservative idea. in the soon decades, they flipped. they went from being supportive and orin hatch backing in 20 years ago, being in strong opposition. mitt romney famously put into place a very similar healthcare law in massachusetts. host: while we're on topic, on the senate side, you wrote about this, it's about the nuclear option passed for judicial nominations and other things. does it stay there? what's your take? guest: at the moment, there's any push by democrats to expand it. there's no question by changing the rules in the senate in the middle of session, republicans were outraged that this will change further in the future. in some future senate when republicans have control, if they have control of the senate and white house, they'll push

through a change on legislation or the democrats will too. it's a pandora's box. once you change the rule and the majority gets to do what it wants, there's no stopping in the future. harry reid said they are doing this because of republican blockading. that said, by changing the rules, it means it's easier to change it again in the future. it's going to keep happening. it sear seriously damaged the bipartisan in the senate. host: shane goldmacher writes for the national journal. he's their congressional correspondent. you can see his writing on the website. thank you and happy new year. coming up, we are going to take another look at russia concerning attacks and explosions over the last couple days. what it means for the security and the sochi games. jeffrey mankoff will be our guest. first, another news update from

c-span radio. >> to that point pedro olympics chief today in his new year's message said terrorism must never triumph. he believes russia will deliver safe and secure winter olympics despite two recent deadly attacks in the city of volgograd. that town is about 400 miles northeast of sochi which will host the olympic games. in afghanistan u.s. officials trying to block a move by an afghan panel to free 88 detainees from a prison north of kabul. the american state of release propose a security threat. other prisoners have been freed. spokesman for the u.s. forces there said the 88 are legitimate threats for whom there is strong evidence supporting prosecution or further investigations. in colorado, pop stores will be open for business this morning. recreational marijuana is now

legal in the state. last night in denver a dispensary set up a food truck and coffee service for people camped out waiting for the opening of sales on what they are calling green wednesday. the group called a prohibitionist over party and they held it right downtown. retail sales began at 8:00 a.m. local time. those are some of the latest headlines on this new year's day on c-span radio. >> we are in the gallery of the building at the museum. we are looking at vanishing ice alpine and polar landscapes and art, 1775 to 2012. the purpose of the exhibition is to highlight the rich cultural heritage of the planet's frozen frontiers. the alpine region, the

antarctica. this is a photograph by a german artist. dating from 2008 and it's exhibited side by side with a photograph by camille seeman also from east green land. it's her last iceberg series from 2006. many people understand the importance of ice for the planet. its reflective quality that help regulate the commitment. many people unaware there's a collective consciousness in the western culture. it is important within the context of climate change to let people know that these regions are fundamental to our identity. >> there's more from the whatcom museum. look at the history and lit ray life of washington.

saturday at noon on c-span two. and sunday at 5:00 on c-span three. host: joining us now is jeffrey mankoff. he's with the center for strategic and international studies. he is the russia program deputy director. thanks for joining us. guest: thanks. host: what is most important for people to know about the recent explosions in russia? guest: well, there's a long history behind this. obviously the olympics, which are coming up in five weeks, provide a bit of background. the concentrating a lot of attention on what's going on. this is part of a much broader insurgency that's been going on since the collapse of the soviet union. now it has taken on a new form in the last five or six years where you have strong islamist underpinnings and groups of people seeking to establish islamic in the caucus region.

this attack is, i think, part of a campaign. it's also connected to the olympics in the sense that there's a lot of international media attention focused on russia now. they will get a lot more bang for the buck. host: has anybody claimed responsibility? guest: no. nobody claimed official responsibility. the russian investigators have said and president putin said, it points back to members of the insurgency. host: as far as the city, volgograd, why this city? guest: well, this insurgency has been going on for quite a while. most of the attacks in the last few years has been concentrated inside the caucus region itself. volunteer go grad is the -- volgograd is the part of the region. in part this is a signal on the

part of the insurgents, they can strike anywhere. this is not only something that will be concentrated against the security forces in the caucuses. they trying to carry the campaign to russia more broadly. host: as far as the reactions from the putin government, what happened and what do you make of how they're handling it? guest: putin waited a little while before saying anything about the attacks. in his new year's message, he mentioned. this morning i guess russian time, tractor-trailered -- traveled to volgograd and met with some of the victims. the focus has been on the military side and the security side and much less on dealing with some of the political and social economic tensions. host: the story they played out in the speech saying, the interior ministry there, more

than 5000 police officers and troops are on patrol and riding on vehicles and foot and conducting door to door searches and checking documents. as far as the ability for the government itself to handle security. what are the resources and isn't the area big for those resources? guest: the resource is substantial. russia has a very large and capable internal security and intelligence service. which of course putin himself came. the problem is this is a very big country. lot of the security effort has been focused on sochi and the up coming olympics. i think that's another reason why you may be seeing bombings in places like volgograd. there's not enough resources to lock down the entire country. with all the attention focused on sochi, the insurgents are showing they have reached outside of the caucus. host: our guest is with us until 10:00 to talk about security issues these blasts are

taking place in russia. he's jeffrey mankoff. you want to ask him questions about it. the numbers to call, republicans 202-585-3881. for democrats 202-585-3880 and for independents, 202-585-3882. if you want to send us a tweet about it, you can do so @c-span wj. that said, should there be concern about security at the actual games? guest: yes obviously. the leader of the insurgency and so called caucus, gave a speech in july where he said the caucus will try to prevent the olympics from taking place. they are trying to send a message to the outside world that russia may not be a safe place and may not be in the interest of the leaders in other countries and delegations to come to russia for the olympics. now that said, obviously the

security response from the government focusing on sochi and the olympics in particular is robust. they've done a substantial job of hardening the venue for the olympics themselves. so the likelihood of successful attack taking place in sochi, is comparatively low. of course, this gets back to the problem of you can't be everywhere at all times. the vulnerability of the country is high. host: is there a sense what the resources are for those insurgents? guest: well, i don't know about the financial resources. they are drawn from a base of disaffected people in the southern part of the country that's heavily muslim. also very deep seeded social and economic problems according to unofficial estimates. youth unemployment is around 70 or higher percent. the industry in the caucuses has collapsed.

infrastructure is very bad. the ethnic russian population has largely fled since the collapse the soviet union. you have a lot of deep seeded problems and frustration. i think this is the tender of this insurgency is using to fan the flames. host: is there support from other country for the efforts? guest: the big concern obviously is what's going on in syria. you have had people from the north caucus who fought with insurgent groups in syria. there are concerns certainly among russians that some of these people are going to get training and combat and insurgency techniques and bring those back to russia at some point when they leave syria. they'll continue to feed into this developing insurgency. host: our guest previously served as council state

department. he did that from 2010 to 2011. first call is from bill from norcross, georgia. good morning on our republican line. go ahead. caller: hi. i have been listening to the gentleman there speaking. i like to remind everybody this situation in russia will be islamic terrorist has been going on for years. nothing has really changed in russia in the last two months or a year. it's been going on for years. the security fears is blown up totally out of proportion. one can say the same thing about having olympic games in the united states that we have, security fears. this gentleman is playing on the fears of people. mr.putin will do a terrific job. guest: you're right. the insurgency in russia has

been going on for close to 20 years now. that said, the government i think has not succeeded in defeating it. you had terrorist attacks in cities throughout russia fairly repeatedly. there's been a low level over the last couple years. what we've seen is this insurgency has under gone a series of transformation since the soviet collapse. it's about the independence of czech. they've been going on. i think we're just seeing another iteration of the same

thing. i would agree with the caller in the since that i think that the chance of a successful attack at the olympic games themselves is comparatively low. i also think it's worth keeping in mind that this is an insurgency several thousand russians has been killed over the last 20 years. if anything, the insurgency is laying down deeper roots in the caucus today. the threat that this poses to individual russians and stability in russia is growing. little bit of perspective is helpful even if a few hundred or a few thousand people are killed in terrorist attacks. that's a much smaller number than who killed in road accidents. nevertheless we tend to sign a greater priority a greater concern to those kind of attacks because it affects our own sense of personal security. host: here is dennis from raleigh, north carolina,

democrats line. caller: my question to the guest is if the attacks occurring in russia at the present time, if any of those attacks should possibly enter into sochi, does the guest think that our government will eventually pull out our olympic delegation and obviously the athletes that make up the united states team? i'm very concerned about that. also just one quick point, has the russian government asked for or have we offered any assistance to them concerning this issue? guest: thank you for your question. on the first point, it's hard to say. there has been terrorist attacks at olympic games in the past. in 1972 where israeli athletes were massacred and the bomb of

the atlanta olympics in 1996. in those cases delegations did not pull out. although, again, those were relatively limited in scope in terms of the casualties. i supposed you can envision a mass casualty attack leading to delegations pulling out, cancellation. a whole host of scenarios that you can think about. i don't know how the united states specifically would react in that situation. i think we would most concerned about the security of our own athletes and our own delegation and do what's best for them. in terms of cooperation with the united states, there has been an area where there's been a fairly significant amount of u.s.-russia collaboration. especially since the boston marathon bombing. counterterrorism has been an area where there's been a lot of work being done by u.s. and russian officials going back to 9/11. as u.s. and russian relationship

deteriorated, some of that fell by the wayside. you have high level officials traveling back and forth and having discussions. you had contacts between the intelligence and security services and talking about this kind of -- about this threat and steps that can be taken. there's still a lot of mistrust between the intelligence agencies. that limits to some degree the amount of information they are willing to share. the political will to work together is there. host: bill king is adding may be it's time to move the summer and winter olympics to fixed locations. 202-585-3881 for republicans and 202-585-3880 for democrats and

independents for 202-585-3882. guest: if you remember, putin first came to prominence in 1999 by vowing to crack down on terrorist attacks. which was a big problem. there has been major attacks in russian cities including in moscow in 1999. putin was seen as a strong hand a person who can cope with this threat. after each of these attacks, putin resorted to tough language about cracking down and rubbing out the terrorists, going after them wherever they are. and the security response has been pretty robust. but nevertheless, we are now 14 or so years on and this insurgency has been -- it's

decentralized at this point. he provides a kind of umbrella. over the last six or seven years, what you had is kind of decentralization as the individual cells have come play a more prominent role. there's a debate within russia about how much operational control or anybody in the central structure they have. whether they're kind of blessing this strategy and it's the individual cell taking the initiative. host: would you know if president putin puts specific resources in fighting this type of terrorism? especially that region? guest: a lot of resources has been devoted to this. specifically was 2.5 billion dollars just for security.

that is on top all of the personnel, the equipment, the financial resources that have been put in into combating insurgency for the last decade in a half. some of it has gone towards reconstruction. one of the ironies is that it's part of the most stable caucus. has really sort of been given free rein to do what he will to put down the insurgency. czech is under this strong hand

rule. host: our guest with us until 10:00 to talk about the security issues light of russia. 202-585-3881 for republicans and 202-585-3880 for democrats and 202-585-3882 for independents. the president and vice president and mr. obama are not going. what's the message? guest: that has already to do with security concerns and the stated relationship with u.s. and russia. the last year has been a fairly difficult one. there's been some pretty profound disagreement over syria. there's been the edward snowden case. there's been a sense that politically russia itself is kind of veering in the wrong direction. remember president obama came into office in 2009 vowing to reset u.s.-russian relations. there was a period for a couple years where u.s.-russia

cooperation was been prioritized by the administration. they got some important gains out of that in terms of russian support on afghanistan, on iran and elsewhere. as that agenda run out of steam, there's been these areas of disagreement that has become more prominent. the administration has become under increasing political pressure to back off. there's the canceled summit last year which happened right at the whole snowden broke. now we're just kind of at a moment where politically there's not a lot to be gained from focusing on cooperation with russia. actually in terms of deliverables, this terms of concrete things that the administration can chalk up, i think setting aside syria where there is some war going on and the geneva conferences will be happening in a couple weeks. there's a sense that we need the

russians to actually conform with a more -- to have more concrete suggestions to doing things together before we can start reengaging. host: newport, tennessee independent line. caller: happy new year. i would like to know, i know russia is a communist country but do they have an n.s.a. program that spies on their public like the united states does? i'll hang up and thank you very much. guest: russia is not a communist country. communist party as the ruling structure of the state collapsed in 1991. there's still a strong soviet legacy. he was a member of the k.g.b. since he's been in power has really strengthened the role of the k.g.b. agency, now called the s.s.b.

to the point it plays a central role in politics. it's important to note that the communist ideology that was so important in the soviet union has a very little purchase in russia today. russia is a very free willing capitalistic society. also a very corrupt one. now in terms of spying and surveillance, yes, russia does a lot of surveillance of individuals, organizations, computer networks and the like. i don't think they're technical capabilities are the same what the united states has which imposes certain degree of limits. clearly, the security services and the intelligence agencies in russia are very powerful. they have a lot of resources and they're known to monitor dissidents to monitor the media and foreign organizations. this has been a very sensitive

political issue in russia. host: here's david from texas, democrats line. caller: i would like to know more about the caucuses. how big of an area is it? how many people live in the caucuses? guest: i don't have precise figures off the top of my head. it's comparatively a small region. it's in the very southern part of russia along the border with a now independent state of the south caucuses. it's very mountainous. because it's mountainous, it's ethically diverse. you have populations speaking different languages. it's a crossroads to cultures as well as regions. there are christian populations there and muslim populations and sunnies and shi'ites. it's a very heterogeneous area.

it was only during the soviet period where you start having large scale colonization. when the soviet union collapse and ethnic russian and other european populations left. now it's an area that feels very different from the rest of russia because most of the population is lack of the better term, indigenous. at the same time, you have the sense in russia that the caucuses becoming a spratt entity. there's a lot of racial tension in russia between the migrants and lot of the migrants are people from the russia. even though they are russian citizens because they have

different ethnics and culture and religion, they are seen as alien or foreign. when you have large number of these people moving to moscow and other cities. okay, it works -- of course it works the other way as well. the ethnic russian population has largely left the caucuses for ethnic russian who travels down there, it's very uncomfortable experience. it feels like a foreign country. host: up next, here's ivy from georgia, independent line. caller: thank you so much for talking about this. i have two questions. the first is there an ethnic divide within u.s. law islamic revolutionary movement in the caucus. if that might contribute or may be affect different parts of where explosions will take place? how are people getting to sochi? are they having to transfer by

train? i've been to russia several times to see family. can they fly in? how is the security preparations for people getting to sochi? thank you so much and happy new year. guest: on the ethnic issue, yes. it do affect the insurgency. for the most part under the umbrella of the caucus emirate you have different cells that are concentrated in providences. the north caucuses is made up seven or eight separate provinces like states. each of those has its own ethnic group. in these individual cells tend to be concentrated within each of those republics. i talked before about how when

this insurgency started it was really about chechnya and chechnya independence. that's not what we should be focusing on. it's not about setting up chechnya as a separate state. it's about over coming these ethnic divisions and setting up islamic state to covers the entire caucuses. that's what the caucus emirate organizations are pushing for. to some degree in aspiration than reality. they continue to matter. on the second question, i don't know how everybody is going to be getting to sochi. there is an airport and obviously for the international guests, most of them will be flying in. i'm not sure what the security preparations are going to be in terms of land access. given the resources committed to

securing sochi and the priority making sure the olympics go off without hitch. i can imagine the security preparations on all of the forms of transportation leading into the region, they are going to be pretty robust. host: jeffrey mankoff is with the center for strategic and international studies. he is their russia program deputy director talking about issues related to security in russia in light of the olympics. one more thing, the delegations heading over to the united states. what's the message it sends to russia and are there concerns that being part of the delegation? guest: i mentioned before, the difficulties in the u.s.-russian relationship and why president obama and vice president biden will not be going. one of the things i should have mentioned was the anti-gay laws russia passed. what has been covered very negatively. had a very negative impact on the perception of russia in the west. by sending billy jean king and

other opening gay athletes to head the u.s. delegation, the u.s. government is sending a very strong message that it support gay rights but it is not comfortable with the restrictions that so called gay propaganda that russia passed. sending billy jean king to the delegation concentrate tensions on the russian side. it's about very specifically the anti-homosexual laws that russia has. it's not u.s. saying you have to do this and that, it's sending a very strong symbolic message that this is something that we care about and we disapprove the way russia handled the issues.

host: jeffrey mankoff happy new year. coming up tomorrow, we will talk about immigration policy. with you heard our previous guest reference that. that will take place at 7:45 tomorrow. also on the program tomorrow author chris adellison will talk about the rule of law. we'll talk about lobbying that took place in 2013. we'll answer your question about that. we'll take a look at the paper and take your phone calls and tweets as well as "washington journal" come your way tomorrow at 7:00. see you then.